"The Church supports our priest for not providing the sacrament. It is obvious that not being absolved of sin and worry for the afterlife is what kept Mr. Plishka alive. In fact, he should be thanking the clergy for condemning his abhorrent lifestyle, even though the head of the Church and our savior Jesus Christ has told us not to judge."

When your religion is built on being a judgemental prick to others, in direct contradiction to the teachings of your deity and his words in your most holy book, maybe it's time to self-examine your problems.

As I understand it, you have to actually repent. Admit your sins and ask God for forgiveness. If you say that whatever you did wasn't a sin, God won't forgive you, and neither will the Clergy (well, unless you make a sizable donation).

/ Not Catholic, but my family was and I went to Catholic school, so I still remember a thing or two...

I honestly didn't think that a priest COULD refuse to give someone the dying sacraments in Catholicism unless they knew the person had been excommunicated from the church.

Well they CAN, but it would have to follow a specific set of circumstances, and I think some details are being left out. Last rites aren't a sacrament, they're a collection of sacraments:

1) Anointing of the Sick2) Penance (Confession)3) The Eucharist (communion)

You can be denied communion if:

A person who is conscious of grave [mortal] sin(<---- "Being a practicing homosexual or a divorced Catholic without annulment counts) is not to celebrate Mass or receive the body of the Lord without previous sacramental confession unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition which includes the resolution of confessing as soon as possible.

Either the priest was way off base, or they hit step 2, Ronald Plishka decided he wasn't sorry he was gay, so step 3 was obviated. You can't be granted absolution for something you aren't sorry for, and you can't get communion if you are conscious of committing a grave mortal sin. The priest isn't talking, but I imagine he did a piss poor job of explaining why he wouldn't do step three, which is what Mr.Plishka was complaining about.

fusillade762:I just saw red. I cursed at a priest. I called him a hypocrite. As he was leaving - I can't repeat what I said, but it was bad. ... I'm thinking I'm going to rot in hell now

Can someone explain this to me? Don't people die all the time without a priest around? Do they all go to hell, too?

No, it's supposed to be a cleansing ritual. Before Vatican II it was considered a good way to knock your time in Purgatory down. That's a gross oversimplification, but it's the general idea. It gives you a way to ask forgiveness for all the shiatty things you managed to do after the last time you went to confession/got communion.

Serious Black:Jesus consorted with some of the most evil and vile people of his time, yet I am positive that he would refuse to bless a gay person on their death bed.

I mean, read about what scumbags Roman tax collectors (like St. Peter) were. Sure, they taxed people into starvation and kept most of it for themselves (and only gave what they had to to the Senate in Rome). And yeah, all those prostitutes were morally questionable. But you know what? Those people were hetero. That's all that matters.

I honestly didn't think that a priest COULD refuse to give someone the dying sacraments in Catholicism unless they knew the person had been excommunicated from the church.

I guess you could do it if you were certain they didn't mean it. Even then, I'm not sure the sacrament is doctrinally required for salvation purposes. I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's explicitly between you and God.

HMS_Blinkin:Serious Black: Jesus consorted with some of the most evil and vile people of his time, yet I am positive that he would refuse to bless a gay person on their death bed.

I mean, read about what scumbags Roman tax collectors (like St. Peter) were. Sure, they taxed people into starvation and kept most of it for themselves (and only gave what they had to to the Senate in Rome). And yeah, all those prostitutes were morally questionable. But you know what? Those people were hetero. That's all that matters.

A person who is conscious of grave [mortal] sin (Either the priest was way off base, or they hit step 2, Ronald Plishka decided he wasn't sorry he was gay, so step 3 was obviated. You can't be granted absolution for something you aren't sorry for, and you can't get communion if you are conscious of committing a grave mortal sin. The priest isn't talking, but I imagine he did a piss poor job of explaining why he wouldn't do step three, which is what Mr.Plishka was complaining about.

I'm not trying to defend the rules, but that's how they work.

Yeah, that's how they work. I know a priest (Episcopalian), he's only heard 2 confessions in 30 years of work.

I honestly didn't think that a priest COULD refuse to give someone the dying sacraments in Catholicism unless they knew the person had been excommunicated from the church.

Well they CAN, but it would have to follow a specific set of circumstances, and I think some details are being left out. Last rites aren't a sacrament, they're a collection of sacraments:

1) Anointing of the Sick2) Penance (Confession)3) The Eucharist (communion)

You can be denied communion if:

A person who is conscious of grave [mortal] sin (<---- "Being a practicing homosexual or a divorced Catholic without annulment counts) is not to celebrate Mass or receive the body of the Lord without previous sacramental confession unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition which includes the resolution of confessing as soon as possible.

Either the priest was way off base, or they hit step 2, Ronald Plishka decided he wasn't sorry he was gay, so step 3 was obviated. You can't be granted absolution for something you aren't sorry for, and you can't get communion if you are conscious of committing a grave mortal sin. The priest isn't talking, but I imagine he did a piss poor job of explaining why he wouldn't do step three, which is what Mr.Plishka was complaining about.

I'm not trying to defend the rules, but that's how they work.

Good post. Plishka didn't say whether he and the priest discussed absolution and repentance for his homosexuality.

I don't know why he'd care, though. If he really believes all this stuff, he's going to hell anyway. It's like he's mad that the priest wouldn't bullshiat him the way he wanted him to, but rather stuck steadfastly to his own bullshiat.

How dare he work at a hospital that explicitly requires that he not invoke such beliefs if he works there, and then do it anyway, like a sneak? The hospital has a policy - he didn't like that policy, he should not have been working there.Plenty of other priests would have performed the ritual without any bullshiat - his position is not compulsory to the faith.

Debeo Summa Credo:dv-ous: Let this be a lesson to him that a backwards, pedophile-sheltering organization is worthless as an arbiter of ethics and morality.

If you have faith, what's important is your personal faith and relationship with god, not what some 40 year old virgin in a dress says.

Who are you to tell him what is important in his faith? His personal faith may place 40year old virgins in very high regard.

Plenty of priests would have just given the guy last rites without the self-aggrandizing attention whore act this priest pulled out of his ass. Priest is an asshole - and so, won't be working at that hospital anymore. The victim survived - so it all ended well.

jso2897:The_Original_Roxtar: how dare that priest abide by what he claims to believe.

How dare he work at a hospital that explicitly requires that he not invoke such beliefs if he works there, and then do it anyway, like a sneak? The hospital has a policy - he didn't like that policy, he should not have been working there.Plenty of other priests would have performed the ritual without any bullshiat - his position is not compulsory to the faith.

Every time anything happens that somebody's Sky Wizard doesn't like, there's howling and gnashing of teeth and rending of garments because RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION. Doesn't matter if the farking pharmacist doesn't do his job, or the people at the hospital are incredibly rude, or otherwise. It's NEVER their fault that they've chosen a position where their particular brand of crap must either be amended (such as in this case) or outright dismissed (as in some civil functions), and if you try to pull them aside and relate to them what an enormous ass they're being they stamp their feet and shriek about how oppressed they are.

This'll be on Fox News soon, with some potatohead ranting about how the evil atheist mooslim communist fascist hospital is asking the priest to 'reevaluate' his position there.

As a Catholic, I think that it's right sad that this priest allowed his politics to triumph over his vows.

Whatever gay boy was, at that point in time he thought he was fixing to die and reached out for God; and what he got was a fellow who told him that he didn't have all his i's dotted and he t's crossed, so God was unavailable. How very sad.

jso2897:Plenty of priests would have just given the guy last rites without the self-aggrandizing attention whore act this priest pulled out of his ass. Priest is an asshole - and so, won't be working at that hospital anymore. The victim survived - so it all ended well.

Because nothing says "self-aggrandizing attention whore" like quietly walking away and then refusing to make a statement on the matter after somebody else runs to the media to cry about it...

jso2897:Debeo Summa Credo: dv-ous: Let this be a lesson to him that a backwards, pedophile-sheltering organization is worthless as an arbiter of ethics and morality.

If you have faith, what's important is your personal faith and relationship with god, not what some 40 year old virgin in a dress says.

Who are you to tell him what is important in his faith? His personal faith may place 40year old virgins in very high regard.

Plenty of priests would have just given the guy last rites without the self-aggrandizing attention whore act this priest pulled out of his ass. Priest is an asshole - and so, won't be working at that hospital anymore. The victim survived - so it all ended well.

Why do you think he won't be working there anymore?

Now that I reread the article, it sounds like he asked whether the patient wanted to say confession- but it doesn't sound like he actually confessed but rather "discusses his history and talked about how excited he was about Francis" etc.

jso2897:Debeo Summa Credo: dv-ous: Let this be a lesson to him that a backwards, pedophile-sheltering organization is worthless as an arbiter of ethics and morality.

If you have faith, what's important is your personal faith and relationship with god, not what some 40 year old virgin in a dress says.

Who are you to tell him what is important in his faith? His personal faith may place 40year old virgins in very high regard.

Plenty of priests would have just given the guy last rites without the self-aggrandizing attention whore act this priest pulled out of his ass. Priest is an asshole - and so, won't be working at that hospital anymore. The victim survived - so it all ended well.

The patient either knew what was going to happen or is clueless about Christianity. The priest wasn't the one who wanted attention here.